The short answer
To stop an agency review being won on presentation, a UK professional services firm should settle the evidence before the meeting and take it from its own accounts: the enquiry log it keeps, plus the records the platforms publish to account holders. The agency then explains any gap between those figures and its own, instead of the managing partner judging how persuasive the slides are.
Key takeaways
- A presented review favours the party that prepared, and that is usually the agency.
- Five of the six review questions can be checked from the firm's own logins before the meeting.
- Google shows an account holder the change history and billing of an advertising account, and the clicks and impressions of a site.
- Send the firm's figures first. A gap becomes a question the agency has time to investigate.
- Decide nothing in the room. Every gap gets a written answer with a date.
Most managing partners treat an agency review as a presentation to be judged. The agency brings slides, the firm listens for confidence, and the hour ends with a feeling rather than a finding. That is the myth: that a review tests the agency. It tests the firm's preparation, and a presented review favours whoever prepared. Of the six questions in the table below, five can be answered by a UK professional services firm from its own logins before anyone opens a laptop. The sixth is a commitment, not a check. The aim is not to catch anyone out. It is to make the meeting about the gap between two sets of figures, which an agency can explain, and not about how well it tells the story of the quarter.
Why a presented review favours the presenter
The agency chooses the measures and the period they are compared with. None of that is dishonest. A supplier will naturally open with what went well. But the partner meets the figures for the first time in the room, with no way to test one before the next slide appears. Our view is that the fix is structural and not a matter of asking sharper questions on the day: move the checking to before the meeting, and move it to records the agency does not control.
| The question | Where the firm checks it | What a checkable answer looks like |
|---|---|---|
| How many real enquiries came in, and from where? | The firm's own inbox, phone log or case management system, counted by hand. | The counts agree, or the agency names the rule that explains the difference. |
| What did you change this period? | The advertising platform's change history, and the website's own edit record where there is one. | Each change is dated and sits inside the agreed scope. |
| What did we pay, and to whom? | The platform's billing pages, set against the agency's invoice. | Media spend and the agency fee are separate lines, and the media line matches the platform. |
| Are we easier to find than last period? | The firm's own Search Console report: clicks and impressions, with average position beside them. | The direction matches the agency's account, and the agency says which pages moved. |
| Who can still get into our accounts? | The user list in each account, against the access record the firm keeps. | Every name is a person or supplier the firm can account for. |
| What will you do next period, and how will we judge it? | The firm's own notes from the last meeting. | A dated plan, with one measure the firm can read for itself. |
Where the platforms keep the evidence
The second, third and fourth rows rest on records Google shows to the account holder. Google's page on reviewing account history describes a record of changes to an account, with the user who made each one. Its page on the Transactions page says that, for accounts on monthly invoicing, past payments, credits, adjustments and costs are listed and can be filtered or exported.
For organic search, Search Console is the equivalent. Google defines an impression as a user seeing a link to the site in results and a click as a user clicking it, in its pages on impressions, position and clicks and on how a site is performing on Google. A partner can read those two numbers without any help.
A mismatch with the agency's report is a question, not a verdict. A platform's count and a firm's own log can differ for honest reasons, and a good agency expects to be asked. The reverse also holds. If the firm cannot open the billing page or the change record at all, that is the first item on the agenda, because the review cannot be checked without it.
What to send before the meeting
Sending the firm's figures first gives the agency time to investigate and not to defend. An agency that finds a gap the night before can bring an explanation. One that meets it live will bring a reassurance.
- The firm's own enquiry count for the period, with the rule it used to count one.
- The screens the firm looked at, each captured with the date.
- The questions the firm wants answered, in writing.
- A request for the agency's change log and invoice for the period, sent with its own figures.
Counting an enquiry the same way twice
The first row fails most often because nobody wrote down what counts. A form submission, a missed call and a message asking for opening hours are all “leads” in some reports. The count in the first row is the firm's own, so the firm should write the rule once, in a sentence, and use it every period. A managing partner might count an enquiry only when it names a service the practice offers and leaves a way to reply. Any rule will do, provided it is the same each time and the agency has seen it. Without one, a rise in the agency's figure and a fall in the firm's can both be correct, and the meeting has nothing to settle.
The rule also protects the agency. A supplier that is told in advance what the firm counts can build its tracking to match, and is then judged on a measure it agreed to.
Running the hour
Start with the gaps and end with the plan. Open with the firm's figures and the differences from the agency's, and let the agency explain each. Move on to what was changed and why, with the change record in front of both sides. Only then take the plan for the next period. Reviews that open with the plan let the agency set the terms of the discussion before anything has been checked.
Decide nothing in the room. “We will look into it” is acceptable once, and only with a date attached. Write the question and the date in the notes, and open the next meeting with them. A request without a date is easy to remember differently.
Add one standing question while the right people are in the room: has any new job begun that touches personal data? The ICO decides whether an agency is a controller or a processor job by job, so a new activity can change the answer. Our piece on which agency jobs the firm instructs and which the agency decides sets out the test.
Reviewing what the agency does in your name
Where the agency posts for the firm, review who can post. The access rules for a firm's LinkedIn Page decide who can do what on the firm's behalf. Checking the admin list belongs in the row on access.
If the engagement included a website build, set what was delivered against the quotation. Our guide to what an accountancy practice website should cost is a way of reading a quote line by line, and the same lines work as a checklist at review.
Before you sign a proposal
Want to know how an agency expects to be reviewed?
Free to your firm. The agency pays us, and only if the relationship works, which is why we would rather ask a supplier how it expects to be checked than place one that has never been asked.
Get a recommendationWhat a good answer sounds like
A good answer names a rule or a screen. “We count a form submission as an enquiry only when it has a phone number, which is why our figure is lower than the platform's” can be tested in a minute. “The platform counts differently” cannot. The test is not whether the agency has an answer. It is whether the answer can be checked by someone who was not in the room.
That standard is also fair to the agency. A supplier that works this way loses nothing from being checked, and a managing partner who has seen the checks pass has a reason to renew that does not depend on a good meeting.
When a formal review is premature
In the first weeks there is almost nothing to review beyond access and the change record. A change to a UK practice's enquiries cannot be seen yet, and a results review held before the date the firm set for a first read gives a partner an opinion about noise. Use the early meetings for the access and change-record rows only, and hold the rest until the date in the engagement. Settling that date before work starts is the cheapest part of the whole exercise.
Nor does a review replace a conversation about whether the engagement should continue. If the checks keep failing and the explanations keep arriving without a rule, the question has moved from the review to the contract. Our own view is that the firm should then take its advice from a solicitor and not from the supplier. For a longer account of what we look for in a supplier, see how we introduce accountancy practices, recruitment agencies, tax advisory and financial advice firms to one agency.
Frequently asked questions
What partners ask about reviewing an agency.
How do you review a marketing agency's performance?
Settle the evidence before the meeting and take it from the firm's own accounts: the enquiry log the firm keeps and the records the platforms publish to account holders. Then ask the agency to explain any gap between those figures and its own. The meeting becomes a conversation about a difference, which an agency can answer, rather than a judgement of how persuasive its account is.
How often should a firm review its agency?
There is no figure we can source, so we do not give one. A sensible rule is to review on the dates the firm set when it signed, with the evidence agreed in advance. A UK practice that has not set a first date for reading results has nothing yet to review beyond access and the change record.
What if the agency's numbers and ours do not match?
Treat it as a question and not an accusation. Platforms and tracking tools count different things in different ways. Ask the agency to name the rule behind its figure and to put the explanation in writing. A rule that can be stated and checked is a good answer. A reassurance without a rule is not.
Can the firm see the agency's change record and invoices?
Often, if the firm has its own access. Google says its account history shows changes to an account and who made them, and its Transactions page lists payments and costs for accounts on monthly invoicing. If the agency has set things up so that the firm cannot open either, make that the first item on the agenda.
When is a formal agency review premature?
In the first weeks of an engagement, before any change could be seen in a firm's enquiries. Review who has access and what has been changed, and leave results until the date the firm set. Reviewing results early gives a managing partner an opinion about noise, and the agency a reason to defend it.
Sources and useful reading
- Google Ads Help, review your account history, for the record of changes to an account and the user who made each one.
- Google Ads Help, the Transactions page, for past payments, credits, adjustments and costs on accounts with monthly invoicing.
- Search Console Help, what are impressions, position and clicks?, for the metrics a firm can read for itself.
- Search Console Help, how are you performing on Google?, for the definitions of an impression and a click.
- Information Commissioner's Office, how do you determine whether you are a controller or processor?, for the role being decided for each processing activity.
This article is commercial decision support and is not legal or financial advice. The table is our proposal for a review and not a standard, and platform screens change, so read the current Google pages. All sources were located on 10 October 2026. Nothing here describes any named agency or engagement.